SIAP... Harvard paper regarding Conspiracy groups

Im not sure if i posted the correct link, if not I will edit or repost it.

Few quotes:

"the best response consists in cognitive infiltration of extremist groups"

"Government agents (and their allies) might enter chat rooms, online social networks, or even real-space groups and attempt to undermine percolating conspiracy theories by raising doubts about their factual premises, causal logic or implications for political action."

Harvard Public Law Working Paper No. 08-03 U of Chicago, Public Law Working Paper No. 199 U of Chicago Law & Economics, Olin Working Paper No. 387

Abstract: Many millions of people hold conspiracy theories; they believe that powerful people have worked together in order to withhold the truth about some important practice or some terrible event. A recent example is the belief, widespread in some parts of the world, that the attacks of 9/11 were carried out not by Al Qaeda, but by Israel or the United States. Those who subscribe to conspiracy theories may create serious risks, including risks of violence, and the existence of such theories raises significant challenges for policy and law. The first challenge is to understand the mechanisms by which conspiracy theories prosper; the second challenge is to understand how such theories might be undermined. Such theories typically spread as a result of identifiable cognitive blunders, operating in conjunction with informational and reputational influences. A distinctive feature of conspiracy theories is their self-sealing quality. Conspiracy theorists are not likely to be persuaded by an attempt to dispel their theories; they may even characterize that very attempt as further proof of the conspiracy. Because those who hold conspiracy theories typically suffer from a crippled epistemology, in accordance with which it is rational to hold such theories, the best response consists in cognitive infiltration of extremist groups. Various policy dilemmas, such as the question whether it is better for government to rebut conspiracy theories or to ignore them, are explored in this light.

"We bracket the most difficultquestions here and suggest more intuitively that a conspiracy theory can generally becounted as such if it is an effort to explain some event or practice by reference to themachinations of powerful people, who have also managed to conceal their role. Thisaccount seems to capture the essence of the most prominent and influential conspiracytheories."

"We bracket the most difficultquestions here and suggest more intuitively that a conspiracy theory can generally becounted as such if it is an effort to explain some event or practice by reference to themachinations of powerful people, who have also managed to conceal their role. Thisaccount seems to capture the essence of the most prominent and influential conspiracytheories."

Quoting: Anonymous Coward 6235765

Well, they got that right.

Anything outside of Official Dogma is proclaimed Anathema.

The bastards' lies are getting so blatant that even the controlled MSM can't cover for them.

In his book, "Between Two Ages," Brzezinski wrote: "The technetronic era involves the gradual appearance of a more controlled society. Such a society would be dominated by an elite, unrestrained by traditional values."

"We bracket the most difficultquestions here and suggest more intuitively that a conspiracy theory can generally becounted as such if it is an effort to explain some event or practice by reference to themachinations of powerful people, who have also managed to conceal their role. Thisaccount seems to capture the essence of the most prominent and influential conspiracytheories."

Quoting: Anonymous Coward 6235765

Well, they got that right.

Anything outside of Official Dogma is proclaimed Anathema.

The bastards' lies are getting so blatant that even the controlled MSM can't cover for them.

"Government agents (and their allies) might enter chat rooms, online social networks, or even real-space groups and attempt to undermine percolating conspiracy theories by raising doubts about their factual premises, causal logic or implications for political action."

I especially like the part about "crippled epistemology".What a bunch of crap coming from someone from Harvard!What kind of horse shit is he trying to fling? The bought out, or wanting to be bought out, sob!5s+P OP!Thanks